Dinesh D’Souza: We’re seeing a surge of atheist confidence and atheist
belligerence. The best-selling atheist books like Hitchens’ God Is Not Great and
Dawkins’ The God Delusion are one indication of this. Another is the militancy
of atheism on many campuses today.
Why is it that when atheists are confident, it's a bad thing: but, when Christians are confident, they're warriors for Christ? Also, note the sour grape over the success of books by Dawkins and Hitchens. Tsk, tsk. And, of course, the reference to college campuses being heathen dens. Funny how he just skips right over the fact that a great many college campuses have chapels and on-site religious advisers...and, let's not forget the student groups.
In a way, the atheist attacks on God and religion are a bit odd. I don’t
believe in unicorns, but I don’t go around writing books about them. I suspect
what has given atheists a boost is the Islamic radicalism we’ve seen in the wake
of 9/11. The atheists glibly equate Islamic fundamentalism and Christian
fundamentalism, and then conclude that religion itself is the problem.
Calling an argument "odd" doesn't make it odd. Mr. D'Souza, you may not write books about unicorns, but many, many people do. They realize that unicorns are mythical creatures, but they make little girls squeal and dream of fairy lands. In short, unicorns are used as a creature in FICTIONAL writing. I don't see atheists writing non-fiction pieces on unicorns either...so what's your point? Most atheist authors I have read don't discuss the characteristics of God, they discuss the way theists worships those gods and the attributes theists give to their god of choice. To put it into simple language, and improve your analogy by making it logically equivalent: we're treating your god in the same way a writer of fairy tales treats the unicorn and saying "Can you believe these people who spend money on the Cult of the Unicorn? There's no such thing as unicorns...so, why are people devoting their lives to them?"
As for 9/11: what is it with you fundies and your need to plug the events of September 11th into every friggin' interview you do? Is it some giant theist bet to see which asshat can work it into their spiel the most times in one year? From what I've learned from my readers and other atheists, the "Islamic radicalism" is running neck and neck with the over-zealous and backwards response of Christian radicalists, as a boost to atheism. Neither party (Islamic radicalists or Christian radicalists) seems rational and reasonable in our eyes. Both are equally scary!
He goes on...
I want to show Christians and religious believers that theism makes vastly
more sense of the world and of our lives than agnosticism or atheism. I also
want to persuade genuine seekers that they should take Christianity seriously,
and give it real consideration. I don’t expect to convince dogmatic atheists,
but I do intend to expose and refute and embarrass them.
Mr. D'Souza, can you stand in front of a classroom of scientists (which would probably include a few believers) and tell them that "God did it." makes more sense than the explanations given in their texts and lectures? When you get sick, do you think that it makes more sense to go to a doctor or pray for a miraculous cure? When you wonder about the tsunamis caused by earthquakes, would you say it's more rational to say "God must've known those people deserved to die." as a response? Or, would you choose the scientifically valid and verified explanation of how tsunamis are generated by earthquakes? When a woman is pregnant and needs an emergency c-section, do you take her to a church or a hospital? Reason, logic, and skepticism will always be better tools to understanding the world- and they happen to be the tools employed by atheists and agnostics without prejudice. We apply them to everything in our lives. We don't suspend the use of them to promote a belief in a fictional deity.
And, while we're addressing this paragraph,...it is not, how shall we say?..."couthe" to suggest that your goal is to embarrass those who oppose you. In fact, it denotes a lack of maturity on your part. Grow up! Leave your unicorns, deities, and useless pandering at the door.
While there are a lot of shallow arguments made by Dawkins, Hitchens, [Sam]
Harris and the others, behind them there is the formidable atheism of
philosophers like Bertrand Russell and Friedrich Nietzsche. My book takes the
new atheists to task on specific fallacies and whoppers that they routinely
make. But I’m not content to defeat them on their weakest ground. So at times I
strengthen their arguments, remove contradictions, and give them the benefit of
every doubt. I attack their argument not at its vulnerable point but at its
Shallow arguments? Only if you're too academically pathetic to understand what you're reading. Maybe you should go back to those books about unicorns? It amazes me that you can accuse someone else of writing fallacies and lies when your whole premise for existence is based on an unproven, untestable, and mythical compilation of oral tales passed down over thousands of years with little concern for concurrence with reality.
If I succeed there, then I have defeated atheism in its strongest and most
coherent form. Ultimately, it is Russell and Heidegger and Nietzsche who pose
the greatest challenge to believers, not intellectual snipers like Hitchens and Dawkins.
That's a pretty big "IF"!
There's more at the link. But, frankly, I started zoning out when he began making claims that "there's a whole body of data" that shows that the world is becoming more religious. Dude...if that's the case, what the hell are you worried about? It kind of squelches any claims that there's a militant contingent of atheists looming on the horizons if you then make the claim that there are more religious people than ever. Not to mention that, even if that was a true statement, there's absolutely no logical reason to believe that the majority is correct because they are the majority or increasing.